LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  September 2003

ZNG September 2003

Subject:

Re: CQL Profiling Proposal

From:

Mike Taylor <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Z39.50 Next-Generation Initiative

Date:

Mon, 15 Sep 2003 09:22:05 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (55 lines)

> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 13:59:37 +1000
> From: Alan Kent <[log in to unmask]>
>
> Being out of things a bit, I did not realise it was not possible
> already.  I think making it extensible is *very* useful. GEO is a
> good example.  But I think any Z39.50 attribute set that comes along
> that defines a new non-USE attribute will also benefit, including
> things like structure attributes (as you point out for dates).

Good.

> I understand the rationale for renaming "index sets", but "context
> sets" does not leap out with clear semantics. Got a better name?
> (CQL Schema?  CQL Profile?)

Well, if we had a better name we'd have chosen it :-)

> So I agree with Section 4, but it would be nice to have a more
> meaningful name than "context set". "CQL Profile" seems not bad -
> its even what you titled your proposal page ;-)

I'm afraid that won't do.  The things currenty called context sets are
not profiles, just as (say) the BIB-1 or Utility attribute sets are
not profiles: they're just collections of named things from which
profiles can be built.

So, for example, when we write the Zthes profile for SRW, it will
reference not only the Zthes context-set (which will provide the
thesaurus-specific index-names such as zthes.nt) but also some other
set to provide the more general indexes such as term-name,
description, etc.

This is an important distinction, as it promotes reusability of
indexes (and relations and modifiers) so that we don't find every
single CQL profile defining its own "title" index.  For much the same
reasons, in fact, that the Z39.50 Attribute Architecture uses the same
approach.

As for the title of the proposal -- "CQL - Profiling New Relations and
Modifiers" -- that reflects what the proposal is _for_, but does not
define the meaning of what a context-set is.

The obvious alternative name, in fact, would be "attribute set", since
the analogy with a Z39.50 attribute set is so strong; but I doubt
anyone wants to go that way?

 _/|_    _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor  <[log in to unmask]>  http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "There is hopeful symbolism in the fact that flags do not
         wave in a vacuum" -- Arthur C. Clarke, on the moon landings.

--
Listen to my wife's new CD of kids' music, _Child's Play_, at
        http://www.pipedreaming.org.uk/childsplay/

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2017
October 2016
July 2016
August 2014
February 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
February 2013
January 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
January 2012
October 2011
May 2011
April 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager